Central Information Commission
Anil Dua vs Ndmc on 5 January, 2018
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi-110066
F. No.CIC/YA/A/2015/002910
Date of Decision : 25.10.2016
Date of Show Cause Hearing : 21.12.2017
Date of Final Decision : 27.12.2017
Appellant/Complainant : Shri Anil Dua, Delhi
Respondent : CPIO, New Delhi Municipal
Council, Delhi
Through:
Mohd. Sabir, SO(Enforcement)/
APIO
Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 31.08.2015
PIO replied on : No reply
First Appeal filed on : 14.10.2015
First Appellate Order on : No order passed
2nd Appeal/complaint received on : 18.12.2015
Information soughtand background of the case:
The appellant vide RTI application dated 31.08.2015 sought information under 8 points regarding list of the eligible squatters vending at the cemented platform touching to the Shop/Flat no. 101, Sarojini Market, New Delhi. CPIO did not respond the RTI application. The appellant preferred first appeal but the same remained unheard. Feeling aggrieved the appellant approached the Commission.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
Both parties appeared during the hearing and the appellant explained that the noise and nuisance created by the illegal squatters right crowding the entire area adjoining his premises prompted him to seek the recourse of law. The Joint Director(Enforcement), NDMC vide letter dated 24.10.2016 has provided a response.
Decision:
The Commission notes the conduct of the Respondent adversely. The communication dated 24.10.2016 from the Joint Director is not only belated but also does not address the query and hence is of no relevance. The Commission directs the PIO, Enforcement to provide correct and specific reply against each of the queries raised by the Appellant vide his RTI application dated 31.08.2015 and state what action has been taken or planned to remedy the problem of illegal squatting at this location. The response must be furnished to the Appellant within two weeks of receipt of this order, with a copy marked to the Commission.
It is learnt that the concerned PIO, Enforcement at the relevant point of time was Mr. Rakesh Chhabra, Dy. Director, NDMC who has maintained complete silence on the queries of the appellant thereby violating provisions of the RTI Act. Accordingly, the Commission directs the Registry to issue a Show Cause notice on Mr. Rakesh Chhabra, which the representative of the Respondent present during the hearing agrees to serve upon the Noticee. Response to the said Show Cause should reach the Commission within two weeks of receipt of this order, failing which legal action in terms of the Act shall follow, on the basis of records of the case.
The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
Show Cause Hearing:
1. In response to the Show Cause Notice issued, communication dated 22.11.2017 has been received from the Noticee. Relevant extracts thereof is as follows:
"......The undersigned was posted as Dy. Director (Enforcement) till 23.10.2015. It is understood that Sh. Anil Dua submitted application under RTI for seeking some information about Teh Bazari / Squatter around shop/flat No. 101, Sarojini Nagar. The same was forwarded to Area Inspector for on the spot verification, which was not reached till my reliving from the department. All the pending RTIs were handed over to my successor.
It also bring to your kind notice that the applicant had also filed a suit before Tis Hazari Court for same cause and in compliance of the court directions, the same information had already been submitted before the Addl. District & Session Judge, Tis Hazari under the court case titled Anil Dua V/s Vijay Sharma & Ors. (Suit No. 134 of 2006). Wherein he had requested for providing "Hon'ble Shri G.P. Theraja Report"
which was produced before the court by the Dealing Assistant under my directions. By producing the same information before the court & a copy to the petitioner, the desired information reached to the RTI Application through the Hon'ble Court.
It is pertinent to mention that in Affidavit by Sh. Ashwani Bhardwaj, Area Senior Assistant, Enforcement Department filed an affidavit in February, 2016 wherein submitted relevant record of Challans of violators/squatters in the said area and also submitted that record pertaining to Feb, 2003 to Sep, 2004 as not traceable. Added, Register of Challans with relevant entries of payment produced before the Hon'ble Court (Copy of the Affidavit enclosed).
Enforcement Inspector, Sarojini Nagar Market submitted the Inspection Report on 09.10.2017 that no Squatter/Hawkers have been found on cemented platform of the Eastern Wall of Shop/Flat No. 101, Sarojini Nagar Market along with photograph. The same was conveyed to the RTI Applicant (Copy enclosed).
Vide letter No. D/1180/PIo(Enf.)/2017 dated 21.09.2017, the reply of department was also conveyed to the RTI Applicant (Copy enclosed).
I tried my level best to reply each & every RTI within the stipulated time without any fail and never been reprimanded by any official. I hope my reply may be taken in good spirit to drop the show cause notice against the undersigned. I assure your self to be more prudent in attending RTIs.
2. An Affidavit of Sh. Ashwani Bhardwaj, Area Senior Assistant, Enforcement Department filed in February, 2016 before the Court of Addl. District Judge, Tis Hazari in Suit No. 278/2013 has also been placed on record by the Noticee. In the affidavit, Sh. Ashwani Bharadwaj has deposed before the Court that relevant record of Challans of violators/squatters in the said area of Sarojini Nagar pertaining to Feb, 2003 to Sep, 2004 are not traceable, being very old records. However, the Register of Challans with relevant entries of payment for the said period was produced before the Court.
3. Apart from the above documents, the Noticee has also submitted a letter dated 11.12.2017 from the appellant wherein he has admitted receipt of reply and Action Taken Report from the Respondent and requested that the instant case be considered withdrawn.
4. The Noticee appeared during the hearing and reiterated his submissions as already made vide the aforementioned letters and correspondences. The Commission notes that information as available has already been provided to the appellant in the form of reply and action taken report dated 02.12.2016, 06.12.2016, 13.01.2017 and 09.01.2017. The Noticee Mr. Rakesh Chhabra who held the post only till Dy. Director (Enforcement) till 23.10.2015 has produced a letter from the appellant indicating his satisfaction with the information received. The explanation dated 22.11.2017 as submitted by the Noticee is found self explanatory and satisfactory. The Commission finds no further reason to prolong this litigation. The penal action against the Noticee is accordingly directed to be waived off and the instant case be disposed of as closed.
File may be consigned to Record Room.
(Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(R.P.Grover) Designated Officer Copy to:-
Public Information Officer under RTI First Appellate Authority under RTI Nodal Officer - (E-BR), Director - EBR, New Delhi Municipal Council, New Delhi Municipal Council, Enforcement Department, Enforcement Department, 2nd Floor, Pragati Bhawan, 1518, 15th Floor, Palika Kendra, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi-110001. Parliament Street, New Delhi-110001.
Public Information Officer under RTI Shri Anil Dua Nodal Officer - RTI Cell, Flat No.-101, 1st Floor, New Delhi Municipal Council, Sarojini Market, RTI Department, Palika Kenra, New Delhi-110023. Parliament Street, New Delhi-110001.